4 ms·

What more can Google even do about the onslaught of ever-evolving SEO spam besides hardcode some arbitrary "winners", which would have its own set of problems?

What more can Google even do about the onslaught of ever-evolving SEO spam besides hardcode some arbitrary "winners", which would have its own set of problems? It seems like a very hard problem.

codingdave 5y ago
But that is the point - it is Google's problem, not ours. They don't have the best info anymore, so use someone else. There are other search engines. If Google wants us back, it is their problem to improve.
- rapind 5y ago
  I’m guessing OP meant it’s a hard problem in general, not just for Google. Also, the statement that Goggle doesn’t have the best information anymore seems objectively false. We can wish there were other players doing it better, but that doesn’t make it true. I’m open to the idea that Google is just riding their wave, but I’ve yet to see proof. I just see the search industry at large shedding quality results. I think Google could step up its ranking game w/ ML eliminating a lot of bad patterns, but I'm not sure they have the will to do it, or are afraid of the consequences (every travel blogger selling an ebook will go apeshit about it for instance).
  - datenarsch 5y ago
    The fundamental problem is that the interests of Google do not align with the interests of it's users. Google is not interested in serving us the "best" search results possible, they are interested in serving us their customers ads. In other words, Google search results are crap, because Google wants them to be crap.
    - rapind 5y ago
      That's far too simplistic. Google must also compete or they lose their free users followed by their paying users (ad buyers). I also think it's a multifaceted challenge that failing some genuine ingenuity won't really get solved. Like I said though, maybe they are just riding their wave (dominance) at this point, but then I'd expect to see better results from a scrappy competitor already or soon. Here's hoping, but even as a discerning user, I haven't yet. I'm confident that even if Google doesn't solve it, for whatever reason, someone else will eventually. In the meantime, results continue to degrade and the desire / reward to fix it will increase.
      - HWR_14 5y ago
        > Google must also compete or they lose their free users followed by their paying users (ad buyers). I have no idea if that's even possible. The number of people who (a) Google pays to be the default engine for and (b) aren't even aware there are other engines is huge. If the various google search domains went offline, the number of people who wouldn't even be able to find facebook is probably a double-digit percent, let alone those who cannot figure out to fail over to bing, ddg, yahoo, whatever.
        rapind 5y ago
        There are more than enough users aware of search to support a fledgling competitor that managed to deliver higher quality results. That competitor simply doesn’t exist yet, and I think that’s because no one has figured out how to beat Google at search (which is why I think real ingenuity is required).
        HWR_14 5y ago
        I thought DDG beat google when it first got going. It seems to have declined and in some cases is no longer even usable anymore.
- lozenge 5y ago
  Google with its hundreds of billions in revenue should be able to solve the problem, right? Not when compared to the trillions of dollars of e commerce revenue that is the reward for getting to the top of Google results - even if you don't deserve it.
  - HWR_14 5y ago
    Total ecommerce in 2021 was around 5 trillion dollars. That's revenue, and split across all players. Somehow I think Google with the ability to devote billions to solving the problem has more resources to throw at it than any ecommerce company. Except for possibly Amazon.
basch 5y ago
hardcode some arbitrary "winners" The point of google is to surface good content above bad content. If they can identify what good content is, surface it, by any means necessary.

What more can Google even do about the onslaught of ever-evolving SEO spam besides hardcode some arbitrary "winners", which would have its own set of problems? It seems like a very hard problem.

codingdave 5y ago

But that is the point - it is Google's problem, not ours. They don't have the best info anymore, so use someone else. There are other search engines. If Google wants us back, it is their problem to improve.

rapind 5y ago
I’m guessing OP meant it’s a hard problem in general, not just for Google. Also, the statement that Goggle doesn’t have the best information anymore seems objectively false. We can wish there were other players doing it better, but that doesn’t make it true. I’m open to the idea that Google is just riding their wave, but I’ve yet to see proof. I just see the search industry at large shedding quality results. I think Google could step up its ranking game w/ ML eliminating a lot of bad patterns, but I'm not sure they have the will to do it, or are afraid of the consequences (every travel blogger selling an ebook will go apeshit about it for instance).
- datenarsch 5y ago
  The fundamental problem is that the interests of Google do not align with the interests of it's users. Google is not interested in serving us the "best" search results possible, they are interested in serving us their customers ads. In other words, Google search results are crap, because Google wants them to be crap.
  - rapind 5y ago
    That's far too simplistic. Google must also compete or they lose their free users followed by their paying users (ad buyers). I also think it's a multifaceted challenge that failing some genuine ingenuity won't really get solved. Like I said though, maybe they are just riding their wave (dominance) at this point, but then I'd expect to see better results from a scrappy competitor already or soon. Here's hoping, but even as a discerning user, I haven't yet. I'm confident that even if Google doesn't solve it, for whatever reason, someone else will eventually. In the meantime, results continue to degrade and the desire / reward to fix it will increase.
    - HWR_14 5y ago
      > Google must also compete or they lose their free users followed by their paying users (ad buyers). I have no idea if that's even possible. The number of people who (a) Google pays to be the default engine for and (b) aren't even aware there are other engines is huge. If the various google search domains went offline, the number of people who wouldn't even be able to find facebook is probably a double-digit percent, let alone those who cannot figure out to fail over to bing, ddg, yahoo, whatever.
      - rapind 5y ago
        There are more than enough users aware of search to support a fledgling competitor that managed to deliver higher quality results. That competitor simply doesn’t exist yet, and I think that’s because no one has figured out how to beat Google at search (which is why I think real ingenuity is required).
        HWR_14 5y ago
        I thought DDG beat google when it first got going. It seems to have declined and in some cases is no longer even usable anymore.
lozenge 5y ago
Google with its hundreds of billions in revenue should be able to solve the problem, right? Not when compared to the trillions of dollars of e commerce revenue that is the reward for getting to the top of Google results - even if you don't deserve it.
- HWR_14 5y ago
  Total ecommerce in 2021 was around 5 trillion dollars. That's revenue, and split across all players. Somehow I think Google with the ability to devote billions to solving the problem has more resources to throw at it than any ecommerce company. Except for possibly Amazon.

basch 5y ago

hardcode some arbitrary "winners" The point of google is to surface good content above bad content. If they can identify what good content is, surface it, by any means necessary.